Shortcuts

AMD FX-8350 Vishera 8-Core CPU Review

rated by 0 users
This post has 30 Replies | 7 Followers

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 26,383
Points 1,192,305
Joined: Sep 2007
ForumsAdministrator
News Posted: Tue, Oct 23 2012 12:03 AM

AMD FX-8350 Vishera 8-Core CPU ReviewEven before AMD officially released its Bulldozer-based FX-Series of desktop processors last year, the company was already talking about the follow-on microarchitecture codenamed “Piledriver”. In fact, in the conclusion of our launch article featuring the AMD FX-8150, we posted an AMD-provided slide that showed Piledriver was already on-deck and that it would offer IPC and power improvements over existing architectures, which would result in roughly a 10% to 15% uplift in performance.

We have already shown you what Piledriver could do in mainstream APUs in our coverage of the desktop AMD A10 and A8-Series of products here and the mobile A10-4600M here, but today AMD is finally refreshing its higher-end desktop CPU line-up, which hasn’t seen a new product launch for just over a year. The updated AMD FX-Series of desktop processors featuring the Piledriver microarchitecture was codenamed “Vishera” and we’ve had the flagship variant, the new FX-8350, in the lab for a couple of weeks now...

AMD FX-8350 Vishera 8-Core CPU Review

  • | Post Points: 200
Not Ranked
Posts 52
Points 555
Joined: Apr 2012
semitope replied on Tue, Oct 23 2012 12:51 AM

results are weird. I5 doing just as well as the i7s in some cases. Are these software tests suitable?

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,361
Points 48,680
Joined: Apr 2000
Location: United States, Connecticut
ForumsAdministrator
MembershipAdministrator
Marco C replied on Tue, Oct 23 2012 9:35 AM

Results are not weird at all. The tests are a combination of single and multi-threaded workloads, and we've got three families / generations of Intel processors represented. In single threaded workloads, the newer Ivy Bridge-based Core i5's are sometimes able to outperform older Sandy Bridge-based chips due to architectural enhancements and higher Turbo speeds. Also note that additional cores and support for HT won't benefit a test that's single or dual-threaded at most.

Marco Chiappetta
Managing Editor @ HotHardware.com

Follow Marco on Twitter

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 4,838
Points 45,830
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Kennesaw
rapid1 replied on Tue, Oct 23 2012 9:51 AM

I just had to make this decision for a client who was having difficulties with her Phenom II 965 system which I recognized because we have the same issues on my system with the same processor and MB and frequent lock ups. This is a different architecture all together from CPU to board to memory bus I know but the price difference for an i7-3820 relative to the productivity it produces for her applications as a professional architect are to good to not go with them. This processor is also a couple weeks to late for the necessity we had at then, either way the price VS the performance makes it irrelevant either way.

OS:Win 7 Ultimate 64-bit
MB:ASUS Z87C
CPU:Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 4770 ***
GPU:Geforce GTX 770 4GB
Mem:***ingston 16384MB RAM
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Tue, Oct 23 2012 7:31 PM

rapid1:
either way the price VS the performance makes it irrelevant either way.

Irrelevant?,......I don't think so.

When you consider that most of Intel's latest CPUs require you to buy a new motherboard to go with your shiny new chip, the AM3+ board's ability to run the latest FX processors gains a new clarity.

Even though I already have an FX-4170, I can just buy a FX-8350 CPU and install it and I'm upgraded. I might need a BIOS update, but that's no big deal. The performance isn't what my i7-2600K gets, but it's completely acceptable for my needs.

________________________________

Marco, I have a question,............I've heard it said that Windows eight has optimizations built-in that take advantage of AMD Vishera's newer design. Is this true, or is it just so much BS?

Did you test this CPU with Win-8 to see if it performs better in Win-8 as opposed to Win-7? Are there any plans to do so?

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,361
Points 48,680
Joined: Apr 2000
Location: United States, Connecticut
ForumsAdministrator
MembershipAdministrator
Marco C replied on Tue, Oct 23 2012 10:13 PM

@Realneil - Windows 8 does have updates to the scheduler that should increase performance and efficiency slightly with Bulldozer and Piledriver, but the I haven't done any official testing. Don't expect much of a boost though--a couple of percentage points here and there, tops.

Marco Chiappetta
Managing Editor @ HotHardware.com

Follow Marco on Twitter

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Wed, Oct 24 2012 9:45 AM

Marco C:
Don't expect much of a boost though--a couple of percentage points here and there, tops.

Thanks for the answer Marco.

I may get one of these FX-8350 CPUs once the prices calm down a little.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 1,104
Points 11,180
Joined: Jun 2010
Location: Pennsylvania
CDeeter replied on Wed, Oct 24 2012 3:48 PM

Me too, the performance looks good enough for me, but Newegg has them listed for $30 over msrp. Maybe next month will be the time to buy.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Wed, Oct 24 2012 4:28 PM

CDeeter:

Me too, the performance looks good enough for me, but Newegg has them listed for $30 over msrp. Maybe next month will be the time to buy.

That's why I'm waiting. I don't like the 'brand new' tax either.

 

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 35
Joined: Nov 2012

Ok, so I am in the middle of deciding between this Amd fx 8350 processor and the Intel® Core™ i7 3970X Six-core 3.5GHz/4.0GHz Turbo 15MB L3 Cache w/ HyperThreading. I have been asking a lot of people for their opinion and really want to know, which processor will preform better? Can someone please tell me which processor has better performance? Thanks.

Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Fri, Nov 23 2012 10:25 AM

They both will perform well, but the Intel part is certainly faster.

You already know that you'll pay a hefty price premium for the extra performance though. The motherboard will be more expensive too.

The bottom line is that the AMD setup is plenty good enough for most uses, but the Uber Expensive Intel part that you're comparing it to is the performance king.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 756
Points 7,645
Joined: Nov 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx

So since I stopped using AMD in 2009, I haven't looked back. I was out of the country when the core 2 duo made its appearance, otherwise I would have jumped ship sooner. The reason I feel the need to make a comment on this one, is because I feel the fx-8350 isn't getting the praise it deserves here. Sure, intel's are faster, they've been faster for a long while now, but AMD hasn't always been about speed, especially over the past few years.

  AMD is more about the price per performance ratio, at least it's always felt that way.  Yet most of us with the funds available still prefer to take the faste, more expensive route, but in reality how many of us even have any sort of bottle necking issue related to our CPU anymore?  Why over pay for minor gains, that aren't even required for todays game when AMD has given us a solid lower power CPU that delivers quite a punch considering it's under $200.

Neil makes a great point here too, with AMD you can swap out chips and you're up and running. With intel we're looking at least $40-$50 for the locked equivalent to the 8350, and then we're dumping more into the motherboard.  I hadn't even thought of this.

AMD may not be the fastest here, but they are back on the path that once put them on top. Let's just hope they finish ironing out the problems bulldozer brought along and give us a product that puts intel back in the rear view.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator
realneil replied on Sun, Dec 9 2012 12:31 PM

I don't have the 8350 myself,.....not yet anyways.

But I realize that these new AMD chips are plenty good enough to give ~good~ game. (you just need a good video card)

As for AMD, I guess that the best complement that I can give them is to buy from them.

I have a Phenom-II 980 Black, and a FX-4170 Quad core and they are both great gamers. Before too long, I'll have the FX-8350 too.

AMD really doesn't have to beat Intel as to performance. All they have to do is to keep producing viable products for less money.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 1,016
Points 10,940
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Mcallen, Texas
OSunday replied on Sun, Dec 9 2012 3:45 PM

So if this processor had to be matched up with an equivalent from Intel's Ivy-bridge series what would it be?

It's one thing to simply say its outperformed by this, but outperforms this but I think it's much more informative to see a direct comparison to it's equivalent from the other side.

It's easier to compare Intel to Intel and AMD to AMD cpu's so finding the CPU that matches one from one brand to another serves as sort of the translator for comparison

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 756
Points 7,645
Joined: Nov 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx

The closest comparison is the i5-3470

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 100 Contributor
Posts 1,016
Points 10,940
Joined: Dec 2010
Location: Mcallen, Texas
OSunday replied on Sun, Dec 9 2012 9:11 PM

Thanks man!

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 4
Points 50
Joined: Feb 2013

Clearly AMD is way behind, they have to use more cores and overclock their processors to have a chance against Intel cpus. Amd is still using the 32 nm process and Intel is on the 22nm and moving on to 14nm process in about a year or so. Similar AMD processors are going into the new consoles and being well underclocked. Can you say "severe bottleneck"?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 756
Points 7,645
Joined: Nov 2012
Location: Dallas, Tx
Dorkstar replied on Thu, Feb 28 2013 1:41 PM

MichaelHenry:

Clearly AMD is way behind, they have to use more cores and overclock their processors to have a chance against Intel cpus. Amd is still using the 32 nm process and Intel is on the 22nm and moving on to 14nm process in about a year or so. Similar AMD processors are going into the new consoles and being well underclocked. Can you say "severe bottleneck"?

Gaming benchmarks say otherwise.  Often times AMD CPU's paired with any GPU outperforms intel CPU's with the same GPU's.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 5
Joined: Mar 2013
AdamEvans replied on Fri, Mar 15 2013 3:28 PM

I recently picked this chip up and I am nothing but impressed with it. I also have a ASUS Sabertooth 990fx r2.0, 32gbs Patriot Viper 3 1866, 2x OCZ Vertex 3 Max IOP 120's on RAID - 0 and a HD 7950 and I am not only running every game, including Crysis 3, maxed out, but when I want to do something, it's there. It overclocks very gracefully. I used ASUS's AI Suite II and MSI Afterburner to O.C. my components and have it stable and air cooled in my Azza Gensis 9000 @50c cpu and 54c GPU temps. CPU is 4.59ghz and gpu is 1.1ghz Core, 1575mhz x 4 RAM clock.

Over clock results, base is almost stock with a very slight o.c.

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f399/CyLMischief/FinalOC-1.png

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 8
Points 70
Joined: Apr 2013

Wish i had the cast to upgrade my system to one with this powering it.I'm an AMD guy and want this cpu :)

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 730
Points 5,865
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: Lewisville, TX
Clixxer replied on Fri, Apr 5 2013 2:49 PM

MichaelHenry:

Clearly AMD is way behind, they have to use more cores and overclock their processors to have a chance against Intel cpus. Amd is still using the 32 nm process and Intel is on the 22nm and moving on to 14nm process in about a year or so. Similar AMD processors are going into the new consoles and being well underclocked. Can you say "severe bottleneck"?

While I do think AMD is still behind Intel for performance, I think they have steadily been catching up. Ive seen alot of benches where Intel and AMD are neck in neck or one is slightly better than the other for gaming but its never by to much when they are using the same GPU like Dorkstar said.

Honestly I think the only thing Intel still has on AMD is manufacturing process and they will throw out that $1000 chip for the guys that have cash to burn. I know AMD is the budget conscious build but in terms of performance on their flagship chips you really cant complain and they all still come with good headroom for overclocking.

My rig - I7-4770K, ASUS Z87-A Mobo, 16 GB Corsair Ram, AMD 7990 GPU, CoolIT AiO Cooler, NZXT H630

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 1
Points 20
Joined: Apr 2013
Bwdzxc replied on Fri, Apr 5 2013 3:11 PM

it competes very well with the 3570k loses by only 1-2 fps!

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 75 Contributor
Posts 1,794
Points 28,475
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: South Carolina

Im looking forward to getting my hands on this FX 8350 pretty soon and matching it up with the ASUS Sabertooth! Its my next goal to build a new Rig around this setup! Always have been a AMD fan guess I always will be! Seeing how Im financially challenged!!!  ( POOR) Its a given that I would go for this Price to Performance ratio rules with me and it just the right fit for me! 

 

 

 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 730
Points 5,865
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: Lewisville, TX
Clixxer replied on Sat, Apr 6 2013 3:01 PM

amdcrankitup:

Im looking forward to getting my hands on this FX 8350 pretty soon and matching it up with the ASUS Sabertooth! Its my next goal to build a new Rig around this setup! Always have been a AMD fan guess I always will be! Seeing how Im financially challenged!!!  ( POOR) Its a given that I would go for this Price to Performance ratio rules with me and it just the right fit for me! 

I know how you feel. I got an first gen i7 and have been keeping tabs on the piledriver chips too for the price/preformance ratio for when I do get the extra cash to update my computer some. I dunno which way ill go but its still worth keeps tabs on to see what AMD has up its sleeves.

My rig - I7-4770K, ASUS Z87-A Mobo, 16 GB Corsair Ram, AMD 7990 GPU, CoolIT AiO Cooler, NZXT H630

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 7
Points 110
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: United States

I've been using AMD for 10 years now..........always perform remarkably and I can do anything, play anything........... cheaper and when I need to upgrade...plug 'n play, not buy compatible parts just to get the newest.........In my mind, very few people need and/or will ever use those "benchmark" advantages espoused by Intelists......Oh....and my 8350 DOMINATES gaming.........

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Posts 8,688
Points 104,345
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
MembershipAdministrator
Moderator

ChrisTrak:
I've been using AMD for 10 years now...

Yeah, me too.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   I use both Intel and AMD for gaming. (two i7- 2600Ks and an FX-8350)

All of them are great performers and do everything that I need them to. A good video card is a must have though,.............

For several reasons, I'll probably always support AMD to some degree.

Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 14
Points 130
Joined: Sep 2012
phenom2 replied on Mon, Apr 8 2013 12:00 PM

I completly agree, my friend Chris. I'm buying AMD cpus from much time....! My latest Intel was an i80486! LOL! Never needed to spend more money for an Intel cpu. I always upgraded when needed, without changing motherboard. My next cpu will be this FX8350. This time I've changed my motherboard, keeping memories...and my phenom2 that is still going good for everything. I do mainly games and it happens I do video encoding...and those 8 cores are so welcome!

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 2
Points 25
Joined: Jul 2013
djay40 replied on Mon, Jul 1 2013 9:51 PM

This CPU really rocks! I've been owning it for a while now and I love it! it is fast and very responsive no matter what I do on my computer.

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 25
Points 200
Joined: Jul 2013

@RepoTactics You make a decent troll here. It's the difference between decently good for $200 or TOTL for $1000. 500% of the price for maybe 40-60% increase in performance doesn't quite add up for me. If you have the money, feel free to spend it, but there really is no comparison if you do.

As for this review of the 8350, I'm still happy with mine. Running mine at 4.3GHz on air completely stable on my Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 with 32GB of Corsair XMS ram @1600MHz. Kind of tiffed that my CPU doesn't quite match up to Intel, but for $200, who can complain?

ASUS Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 : AMD FX 8350 @ 4.3Ghz : Corsair XMS 32GB @ 1600Mhz : 2-way SLI EVGA SC 4GB 670 : CM HAF 932 Blue Full Tower : Assorted HDD and SSD : FANS and MOAR FANS

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 4
Points 50
Joined: Jun 2014

I was wondering if it was worth it to buy this cpu. I have the 8120 and it performs well decently but I was wondering if it was worth buying the newer 8 core?

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 358
Points 2,565
Joined: Sep 2011

Yes, If you can, I think you should.  I think you will notice a difference.  But make sure your motherboard can support a newer fx cpu.  You will probably need to update your bios. If you do decide to upgrade, get the fx 8320 instead of the 8350 and over clock it.  It will save you a few bucks.  Also be sure to get a good after market CPU cooler if you don't have one.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (31 items) | RSS